Re:Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
by saurik on Friday April 23, 2021 @08:49AM
(#26914194)
I haven't looked into the source of this specific exemption yet, but if it is the mechanism I think it is -- a ruling on an exemption petition -- it is important to understand that this exempts a user from circumventing the protection mechanism but it does not provide any kind of exemption for "trafficking" in tools that help people actually perform the circumvention... which frankly makes a lot of these exemptions feel a bit academic :(.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Apple is sued for telling you that you're “buying” movies
by lrvick on Friday April 23, 2021 @07:16PM
(#26920374)
Maybe, but archive.org has listed this exemption on their website for years as their rationale for being able to distribute ROMs for dead consoles and it has totally remained unchallenged AFAICT.
Copyright enforcement seems often "use it or lose it"
SPAM didn't act fast enough to protect their brand, and once it became commonplace as a term for internet garbage it was considered too late to enforce.
Unless someone like Nintendo makes a new Super Nintendo that can play original cartridges, I don't expect they would do well in court trying to enforce given the exemption and after doing nothing for so long at this point.
I study IP law academically but IANAL. With that said, I think we are honestly at a free for all at this point, and the more people that host ROMs openly, the worse the case against them gets.